|Calicchio and his attorney Elise DiNardo listen to Minutillo's testify- June 7, 2012|
Did you visit Da Horsey's stable today?
He's released a portion of the State of New Jersey vs. Matt Calicchio court transcript! Wow!
GA has read the full 45-page document, but as a courtesy to Da Horsey who obtained it through a reader fundraising drive, will limit discussion here to whatever my 4-legged friend chooses to release.
Until of course, the whole thing enters the public domain.
Until then: drip... drip... drip...
First, I wish to thank the Plaintiff's lone supporter left in the court that day (after the rest of us were ousted) who gave GA her copious notes- they were on-point accurate. Miss Witness, you were terrific.
Onto the published excerpt. Let's play a game called 'WHO Said It'.
Straight from the transcript, the 'charity' was referred to by 3 different names. One was correct. Match the name with the person who said it:
(a) Elise Dinardo (Defense attorney)
(b) Matt Calicchio (Defendant)
(c) Tania Garcia (Defendant's witness)
- "Mason Family Civic"
- "Mason Civic "
- "The Mason Civic League" (correct)
Hint #2: DiNardo is a practicing New Jersey attorney since 1989 and has had her own firm since 1992. Her specialties:
"Elise is recognized for her prominence in criminal defense endeavors on both the State and Federal levels including but not limited to police misconduct, sexual harassment, civil rights, racial profiling, and employment discrimination. She has represented individuals in murder, arson, and white-collar crimes always helping to insure the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial."(Listen, somebody has to defend alleged murderers, arsonists, sexual deviants and Lane Bajardi right?)
Ready for the answers? They are: (a) 3, (b) 1 and (c) 2.
So what? you say. Big deal, that neither Calicchio nor Garcia could name their employer. It was just an innocent mistake.
Oh no, my friend. The 'tell' is that DiNardo got it right. A lawyer-friend I spoke to this morning put it this way: "She was not going to participate in their charade, in their games."
So, DiNardo drew the line at co-conspiracy.
By referring to the 501(c)(3) 'charitable organization' by an alias, which any money laundering investigator will tell you is a method of shielding an entity's financial operations from public scrutiny, DiNardo would have been a participant in the 'game'.
She elected NOT to do that.
(Unlike ANOTHER lawyer who DID.)
|Oh what a tangled web we weave|
When first we practice to deceive. - Sir Walter Scott (Marmion, 1808)
But, assuming she prepped her client's court testimony, and that of his witness,why did neither know where they worked?
DiNardo walked with them up to the line and they crossed.
GA has observed that the 'charitable organization' where Garcia and Calicchio claim to work seems to be closed more than it is open.
Then how to explain all those hours on the payroll of a tiny Gallery plus that of a part-time curator (the girlfriend of Mason operative Ryan Yaaco) as a tax-exempt charity-after filing 2 years of e-Postcard tax returns to the IRS?
How does the charity actually pay their employees?
Beth Mason has not filed mandatory expense reports to the NJ Attorney General for the past 2 years.
And Mason's e-Postcard IRS filing omits any detailed reporting of income and expenditures.
That means state and federal tax collection entities don't know. And neither Calcchio nor Garcia know who they work for. AT least under oath.
That's a whole lotta smoke.
No wonder DiNardo drew the line. The fire is on the other side.